With craft-beer volume growing nationally in the double digits and – just to cite one example – Breckenridge Brewery just announcing plans for a $20 million new brewery complex along the South Platte River in Littleton, it may seem somewhat odd for the U.S. Justice Department to file an antitrust lawsuit against Anheuser-Busch InBev’s (ABI) proposed acquisition of Grupo Modelo, the maker of Corona and other beers.

Competition in the suds industry seems to be thriving, not at risk of flickering out.

Last year, in fact, the Beer Institute announced that there were now more breweries operating in the U.S. than at any time in American history – with over 2,700.

Still, this federal antitrust action isn’t nearly as lacking in merit as some we’ve seen from Washington, such as the one the Federal Trade Commission pursued against Whole Foods a few years ago when it acquired Wild Oats. Although craft brews are thriving and the legacy beer industry is stagnant or contracting, “ABI and Modelo – the largest and third largest beer firms, respectively – together control about 46 percent of annual sales in the United States,” the Justice Department pointed out in a press release explaining the suit. “MillerCoors, the second largest beer firm, accounts for about 29 percent of nationwide sales.”

According to that press release, the department’s complaint argues that “the U.S. beer market is already highly concentrated, and prices are increased by strategic interactions among the largest brewers, including ABI and MillerCoors. ABI generally acts as the price leader, implementing annual price increases in the sub-premium, premium and premium plus segments of the U.S. beer industry. MillerCoors and other brewers have typically joined the ABI price increases, while Modelo has not. By pricing aggressively, Modelo – through its importer, Crown Imports – puts pressure on ABI to maintain or lower prices, especially in certain parts of the country. As a result, Modelo has become a particularly important competitor in the U.S. market.”

If Modelo truly has acted as a check on price increases, then maybe Justice has good case. But here in the craft brew paradise that Colorado has become, the idea that competition is in jeopardy is a difficult sell.

The top federal prosecutor in New Orleans resigned Thursday, amid allegations that some of his top deputies had been posting anonymous comments about active cases on a newspaper website.

Jim Letten, who had been the longest-serving federal prosecutor in the nation, did not give a reason for his decision to step down. The Justice Department is investigating the comments, which were posted to nola.com.

Letten was a U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Louisiana for 11 years, having served 28 years in all as a federal prosecutor.

Letten oversaw prosecutions of the Danziger bridge police shootings in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and he has pursued Louisiana politicians for public corruption cases.

It’s a shame that Letten, who is known as a straight arrow, will end his tenure this way.

Gov. John Hickenlooper and Attorney General John Suthers sent a letter this week to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reiterating their interest in the Justice Department’s attitude toward Amendment 64: Namely, will it try to block the marijuana-legalization measure?

Unfortunately, the five paragraph letter never once suggests that Hickenlooper and Suthers would like the Justice Department to honor Colorado voter intent. To the contrary, it emphasizes the options the feds could take to derail 64, such as taking “legal action to block the implementation of Amendment 64″ and prosecuting “grow and retail operations.”

“Importantly, we also need to know whether the federal government will regard Colorado State employees who regulate and oversee the growing and distribution of marijuana as acting in violation of federal law,” they write – never thinking to point out that Holder doesn’t have to reach this particular conclusion.

To repeat what I said in a column last week, “Is it too much to ask top state officials to go to bat for voters who just passed an amendment that the federal government might not like?”

An inspector general’s report released Wednesday showed failings by no fewer than 14 federal law enforcement officials for their parts in a gun trafficking investigation that resulted in the circulation of 2,000 illegally-purchased weapons.

The 471-page report is a damning history of the ill-conceived Fast and Furious investigation. There is a lot of blame to go around.

But it is important to make note that the inspector general concluded that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder did not have prior knowledge of Fast and Furious, despite accusations and blistering criticism from the right, including congressional Republicans who led a House charge to cite Holder for contempt.

Keep in mind, the IG had access to a trove of documents that congressional investigators did not, “including grand jury information and internal e-mails that President Obama, citing executive privilege, refused to hand over,” according to the New York Times. While it may not quiet all the conspiracy theories involving Holder, it should take some of the steam out of such efforts.

Fast and Furious was a weapons trafficking operation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to trace illegal gun purchases by straw buyers who were suspected of obtaining the guns on behalf of big-time Mexican drug cartels. Investigators allowed the guns to “walk,” and some of them turned up at crime scenes, including the 2010 killing of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.

Critics had contended that Holder not only knew about the operation, but approved it in an effort to justify pursuing tighter gun control policies.

Though there still is plenty of room to criticize how the program was handled, this exhaustive, independent report has essentially cleared Holder of that terrible allegation. It’s time for Holder and Justice to move forward and appropriately discipline those whose conduct contributed to this shameful chapter in federal law enforcement.

A marijuana plant is seen growing at a medical marijuana convention in Dec. 2010.

So just like that, the Obama administration has apparently shifted its position on medical marijuana and thrown Colorado’s entire fledgling industry into limbo.

Maybe you welcomed the growth of medical marijuana dispensaries in Colorado during the past 18 months. Or maybe you deplored them. But the fact is the federal government has had plenty of opportunity to signal that it would not tolerate these enterprises — and yet never bothered to weigh in with that stark message.

To the contrary. When the Drug Enforcement Administration arrested Highlands Ranch grower Christopher Bartkowicz last year and the Justice Department charged him with crimes that could have put him away for life (and actually resulted in an ugly five-year prison sentence), federal officials pointedly noted that he possessed more plants than he needed for the 12 patients for which he functioned as official caregiver.

Vincent Carroll is The Denver Post's editorial page editor. He has been writing commentary on politics and public policy in Colorado since 1982 and was originally with the Rocky Mountain News, where he was also editor of the editorial pages until that newspaper gave up the ghost in 2009.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.

To reach the Denver Post editorial page by phone: 303-954-1331

Posts by Category

Posts by Category

Idea Log Archives

Idea Log Archives

About The Idea Log

The idea log The Denver Post editorial board shares commentary and opinion on issues of interest to Coloradans.